Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1545155
10 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 31 MAY 2026 NEWS Every minute €67,000. Here Engineer Marco Cremona says congestion costs maintenance. He spoke to Juliana Zammit EVERY morning, hundreds of thousands of people across Mal- ta get into their cars. They sit in traffic. They arrive late, or just about on time. And then they do it again in the evening. It has become so normal that most people no longer think of it as a cost. However, Ing. Mar- co Cremona has calculated ex- actly how much one minute in traffic costs, and it's so funny, at €67,000, even the number is a joke—six, seven, anyone. The Maltese engineer, who was awarded the Ġieħ ir-Repubbli- ka in 2014 and nominated for the Stockholm Water Prize, has spent months calculating what that daily frustration is worth. His conclusion—traffic conges- tion costs Malta €1.13 billion every single year, roughly equiv- alent to the country's entire national capital expenditure in 2025. "The private car is not the problem. The problem is the number of cars," Cremona said during a transport presentation held by Momentum, the party that has adopted his proposals into its electoral programme. Six days a year, gone The figure is built from two calculations. The first covers time. Malta has around 400,000 commuters who rely on private cars, making four trips a day, av- eraging 25 minutes per trip. Cre- mona estimates that 25% of that time is pure waste; time spent sitting still in congestion rather than travelling. He notes that the figure is higher during peak hours and lower at night when roads are empty. Valued at €10 per person-hour, a figure he describes as conserv- ative given that Malta's average gross wage is closer to €15.58 per hour according to the NSO Labour Force Survey Q1 2025, and that the statutory minimum wage stands at €5.74 per hour, which adds up to 60.8 million hours lost annually. In simpler terms: 166,667 hours wasted every single day as a country. For the individual commuter, it amounts to around 152 hours a year, more than six full days lost to traffic. Broken down further, one minute of traffic costs Malta ap- proximately €67,000. For the in- dividual commuter making four trips a day, wasting 25 minutes in traffic costs around €4.17 per day, roughly the same as the fuel bill for those trips. The fuel bill The second component covers fuel. Based on an average of four trips a day over 11 kilometres, using a consumption rate of 7.9 litres per 100 kilometres for a typical average-sized family car, and a subsidised petrol price of €1.34 per litre, the national fuel bill for Malta's 331,000 passen- ger cars comes to €518 million a year. Together, the two figures reach €1.13 billion. And Crem- ona is the first to say that is the conservative version of the story. What the number leaves out His calculation deliberately ex- Planning Commission approves hotel in Gharb square THE Planning Commission has approved an application which foresees a limited roof structure and an ODZ pool for a new 16 room boutique hotel and a res- taurant. The application (PA/03239/24) presented by Jessica Mizzi fore- sees the development of hotel at 106–108, Triq il-Knisja, Għarb a few metres away from the parish church. The decision followed revised submissions and conditions ad- dressing issues related to build- ing depth, roof structures, and site works. The commission chaired by Martin Camilleri noted that the proposed depth of the devel- opment would not exceed 30 metres and reflected existing commitments in the area, as in- dicated in a block plan submit- ted by the applicant's architect. With regard to roof structure, the commission noted that revi- sions had been made to reduce their visual impact and to limit the formation of blank party walls. It was also noted that the extent of the building footprint lies within the development zone boundary, except for the pool and decking area, which were assessed in relation to the Rural Policy and Design Guid- ance (RPDG). The approved design includes conditions requiring further amendments to drawings. These include the submission of revised plans showing an up- per-level lift, with a slanted roof and an internal height not ex- ceeding 2.4 metres. The overall height of the lift structure, measured from the finished floor level of the sec- ond floor, is not to exceed 3.4 metres. Roof structures are to be finished in unrendered franka stone, in accordance with spec- ified requirements. The Superintendence of Cul- tural Heritage (SCH), in a sub- mission dated 29 April 2026, had reviewed updated doc- umentation including works method statements and eleva- tion drawings. While noting that the overall building depth remained unchanged and ex- pressing preference for develop- ment respecting predominant building depth in the area, the SCH did not object to the pro- posed methodologies subject to conditions. These conditions included re- quirements that replacement stone blocks match the original size and height, that cladding is not permitted, and that stone surfaces be finished fair-faced without sawmill marks. The SCH also specified that no masonry blocks are to be hacked, mortar joints are not to be finished with wire brushing, and pointing is to be carried out using lime-based materials, ex- cluding cementitious mortars, subject to trial patches. Further conditions required that works follow the approved works method statement and elevation drawings, with any deviations to be approved on site by built heritage monitoring officers. The SCH also required notifi- cation at least two weeks prior to commencement of works, and confirmed that the site would be subject to inspection. The architect remains responsi- ble for structural integrity dur- ing works. A bank guarantee of €1,200 was indicated for reinstatement of the cornice and masonry bal- cony. The case officer's report not- ed that, while SCH concerns regarding roof structures and building volume were acknowl- edged, similar developments exist in the area, citing five dif- ferent permits issued between 2003 and 2022. It was also stated that the proposed roof struc- tures are set back further than surrounding developments and are not visible from the street frontage. Regarding the pool and deck- ing area, the case officer noted that Policy 6.4 of the RPDG per- mits such facilities within curti- lage of legally established dwell- ings, subject to area limitations of up to 75 square metres for combined pool and decking. It was stated that the proposed de- velopment complies with these parameters. JAMES DEBONO jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt